Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews parks fee schedule changes; staff clarifies field naming and rates for multiuse sites
Summary
Deputy city administrator David Goldman and Parks Director Brian Smith presented proposed updates to Schedule G (Parks & Recreation) and Addendum 2 (Senior Services) that consolidate fees, change hourly reservation rules, and clarify field classifications and pricing for multiuse fields in CivicRec.
Oak Harbor staff on Monday reviewed proposed updates to the Parks and Recreation master fee schedule, including consolidation of Senior Services into Schedule G, hourly field reservation rates and clarifications about how multiuse fields will be named and billed.
David Goldman, the city’s deputy city administrator and finance director, and Brian Smith, parks director, told council they moved Senior Services into Schedule G and proposed hourly facility and field reservation rates, annual on‑site storage rates, monthly concession‑stand charges and updated room rental pricing tied to the activity guide and CivicRec registration system.
Several council members pressed staff on how multiuse practice fields are classified and billed. Craig (parks staff) explained the fee structure is tied to the field itself, not the sport: “It’s not based upon what sport is actually playing on it, but what fields they’re actually using.” He said the city’s two sand‑based fields (the “game field” and the “practice field”) draw higher rates because they require more intensive maintenance (aeration, irrigation and mowing).
Brian Smith corrected an earlier exchange by clarifying that the city does not charge for practices at certain fields: “We don’t charge for practices. So it’d be a 0 charge. We only charge for games,” he told council later in the meeting.
City staff said rates were developed from a combination of a market comparables study and maintenance cost considerations; staff noted overall cost recovery on current rate proposals is low (Craig cited “about a 7% cost recovery”). Staff said they tried to avoid sharp increases that would harm local leagues and that they can adjust methodology if council wishes to set a target cost‑recovery percentage.
Council members also asked about CivicRec (the city’s online registration platform) showing field names and whether it can include a map; staff said CivicRec currently lists fields textually but that they can provide images and a site map for users and that the communications team will add clarifying material to the website.
On specific fees, staff said the packet’s redline version showed layout spacing issues and that the clean version contains corrected alignment of rates (for example, Tiny Tots vs. Select rates). Several council members said they were satisfied after staff follow‑up and one councilor asked staff to rename fields with recognizable labels to avoid confusion.
Ending: Staff said they will add a visual site map to CivicRec and the city website, finalize clean fee schedule language and return the ordinance for adoption. Council did not take a formal vote at the meeting.
